Week 8: Prosocial Behavior

What is ‘prosocial behavior’? 

• Def: a broad category of actions considered beneficial to others and as having positive social consequences 

  • Prosocial behavior contrasts with antisocial behavior that is aggressive, violent or destructive (i.e. donating to charity, intervention in emergencies, cooperation, sharing, sacrificing, volunteering) 

  • Relating to or denoting behavior which is positive

How does ‘helping’ differ from ‘altruism’?

• Helping: a prosocial behavior that has the consequence of providing some benefit to or improving the wellbeing of another person. 

  • Intent is unimportant, no requirement that the helper intends to benefit another person

  • Egoistic: the helper can also benefit from helping 

• Altruism: helping that is intended to provide aid to someone else without expectation of any reward 

  • Comes at a cost to the helper

  • Intentions do matter; the helper must intend to benefit the other 

What are three motivations of prosocial behavior?

• Egoism - humans can be selfish in nature, and helping others can result in an individual's own gratification

• Empathy - this view garners humans as more generous and unselfish, capable of real concern for the welfare of others

• Evolutionary - this view sees prosocial behavior as an evolved trait to help ensure that individuals pass their genes onto the next generation

What is the ‘empathy-altruism model’ of helping behavior?

• Def: this model proposes that adults can experience two distinct states of emotional arousal while witnessing another’s suffering : distress and empathy

  • Distress: involves unpleasant emotions such as shock, alarm, worry, and upset 

  • Empathy: entails such emotions as compassion, concern, warmth, and tenderness toward the other 

What are some characteristics of the needy that foster helping?

• Acquaintanceship and liking: we are more inclined to help people whom we known to whom we feel close 

  • Relationships increase helping because they involve relatively stronger normative obligations and greater costs if we fail to help 

• Similarity: we are more likely to help others who are similar to ourselves than to help others who are dissimilar 

  • Much of the effect of similarity is a product of perceived group membership because people tend to help in group members than out group members

  • Deservingness – whether we see someone as deserving help has important implications for our desire to act on their behalf

    • Potential helpers respond more favorably when a person’s need is caused by circumstances beyond their control.

According to Amy Cuddy et al., what is the effect of out-grouping on prosocial behavior?

• Much of the effect of similarity is a product of perceived group memberships… people tend to help in-group members more than out-group members

• Out-group members alo experience lower levels of secondary emotions, thinking they would experience less grief than someone in-group.

What are some normative factors that influence prosocial behavior?

1. Social responsibility norm is a general norm stating that individuals should help others who are dependent on them 

   1. You must do anything you can to help that person 

      1. Stronger and weaker versions of the social responsibility norm (the belief that we must help needy strangers or unknown persons is not as universally accepted) 

2. The norm of reciprocity: 

   1. Help those who have helped them and not help those who have denied them help for no legitimate reason

      1. People try to match the amount of help they give to the quantity they received earlier. 

      2. By matching benefits people maintain equity in their relationships and avoid becoming overly indebted to others 

3. Personal norms 

   1. This refers to the feelings of moral obligation to perform specific actions that stem from an individual’s internalized system of values 

      1. Personal norms may stem from role identities 

4. Gender norms: 

   1. There are significant differences in the ways men and women help which are related to gender role norms and expectations 

      1. Men are more likely to help in dangerous emergency situations; women in situations requiring nurturance 

5. Situational influences: 

   1. A key influence in helping is the presence of behavioral models, someone else who is helping 

      1. Models show what kinds of help are possible, convey messages about the suitability of helping and provide information about the costs and risks of helping 

6. Audience: 

   1. Others sometimes increase helping by serving as an audience (i.e. people tend to give more money in donations if it is known that the donation will be public) 

7. Mood

   1. When individuals are in a good mood, they are more likely to help others 

      1. Bad moods can suppress helping because they lessen the salience of others’ needs. People in a bad mood are concerned about their own problems 

8. Costs: 

   1. Bystanders make calculations about the potential costs of giving help and the costs of not giving help 

      1. Helpers may be willing to endure higher costs to themselves if the costs to the victim or not receiving help are extremely high 

According to John Darley and Daniel Batson, what situational factor was significantly related to the occurrence of helping behavior?

• The hurry variable was significantly related to helping behavior — the message variable was not

  • Message – subjects were instructed to provide a brief talk on either (1) the vocations of seminary students or (2) the Good Samaritan parable

    • Subjects were then given a map and told to walk over to an adjacent building to have their talks recorded

  • Hurry – before they left, subjects were told (1) you’re late (high hurry); (2) they’re ready for you, go right over (intermediate hurry); or (3) it will be a few minutes before they’re ready for you (low hurry)

• A person not in a hurry is more likely to offer help to a person in distress than a person who is in a hurry

• A person going to speak on the parable of the Good Samaritan did not significantly increase helping behavior

What is ‘bystander intervention?

• The term denotes a quick response by a person witnessing an emergency to help another who is endangered by events (i.e. kitty murder, no one helped her in their neighborhood

  • Given potential dangers whether and how to intervene in an emergency is a complex decision 

What are the five stages of Latane and Darley’s bystander intervention decision making process 

1. Notice the event

2. Interpret the event as an emergency 

3. Assume responsibility

4. Know appropriate forms of assistance 

5. Intervene

What is the ‘bystander effect’?

• as the number of bystanders increases, the likelihood that any one bystander will help a victim decreases

  • Processes involved:

    • Definition of the situation – in the heat of the moment, people are often not certain how to respond to unusual situations [which can] delay reactions and stall a decision to act

      • People look to the reactions of others for cues about what is going on and how to react – in this way, bystanders inhibit each other from helping

    • Evaluation apprehension – concern about what others expect of them and how others will evaluate their behavior

What is the ‘diffusion of responsibility’?

• Def: a bystander does not take action because others share the responsibility for intervening 

• With bystanders, the responsibility to intervene is shared, as is the blame, if the victim is not helped

  • When one and only one bystander witnesses an emergency the responsibility to intervene is focused wholly on that individual

  • Step 3 of the decision sequence (assume responsibility)